Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

One Big Open, with Sections

The irrepressible Bill Goichberg is trying something completely new and different for Seniors at the World Open this year. From the  tournament announcemant: Senior prizes: Open to rated seniors age 65/over, based only on score (section doesn't matter): $1800-1200-600-400. I would not be eligible for these prizes as I have yet to attain the requisite age. This is another example of the varying age at which older players are considered to be a 'Senior'. One has only to attain the age of fifty to play in the US Senior, for example.
This is the first time I have ever seen players in different sections competing for the same prize. Let me say that I have written on numerous occasions that there is only one World Open; that being the open section of the World Open. The ancillary tournaments held in conjunction, and at the same location as the World Open are just that, ancillary.  They are NOT the World Open and should NEVER be called the World Open. A section winner should never say he has won the 'World Open' although it happens, in the same way that some young spud who has won an age limit 'world championship' should never say he won a 'world championship'.
If I were eligible to play, and played in the 'A' section, scoring 6 1/2-2 1/2 to lead all 'Seniors', when a Senior playing in the World Open scored 6-3, it would be preposterous for me to say I had a better tournament and deserved the top prize. To award the top prize to a player in the lowest section who outscores a Senior player in the World Open proper is ridiculous and the height of absurdity! This is, quite simply, the dumbest thing I've  heard in some time. Why stop at those 65 and over? Why not have everyone, no matter what section, compete for the same prizes? After all, those who toil in the depths of the lower circles support  the prize fund of those fortunate enough to play in the upper circles, do they not? If there are 500 players in one of the lower sections, but only 100 in the top section, those in the lower section compete for LESS money than those at the top! It is as if the World Open is run by Republicans, who tax the middle class and the poor to give to the wealthy. Why not have one big tournament, with players competing against only those of their own class for score, but competing for prizes against everyone in every other class! Think of it...A GM in the top section sitting across from another GM, in a hopelessly drawn position, both afraid to offer the draw because some guy in the 'D' section looks like he is about to win and maintain a perfect score! That oughta cut down on draws considerably, don't you think?

Comments


  • 4 years ago

    nocab

    What, me use sarcasm?!Surprised

  • 4 years ago

    Parx

    Mr. Bacon:

     

    I agreed with just about all of this, until, " It is as if the World Open is run by Republicans, who tax the middle class and the poor to give to the wealthy."  You, who researches everything else so carefully, can't possibly still believe this old, false-since-the-moment-it-was uttered shibboleth, can you? 

    Then, you propose "Why not have one big tournament, with players competing against only those of their own class for score, but competing for prizes against everyone in every other class!"  Which sounds exactly like what B.Goichberg is doing, only drawing lines in the who-plays-who list, based on ratings.  I figure I could be wrong about this two ways:  either that was all an explanation of BG's plan as sarcasm, or I don't understand your proposal correctly.  In which case, perhaps you could clarify.

     

    All the best,

    --EP

Back to Top

Post your reply: